Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 85 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Anne Gowing 020 8541 9938 Email: anne.gowing@surreycc.gov.uk
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Mr Few and Mrs Hammond. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: 22 April 2014
Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 22 April 2014 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
PROCEDURAL MATTERS
Additional documents: |
|
|
Members' Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Public Questions
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Petitions
Additional documents: Minutes: There were none. |
|
|
Representations received on reports to be considered in private
Additional documents: Minutes: No representations were received. |
|
|
REPORTS FROM SELECT COMMITTEES, TASK GROUPS, LOCAL COMMITTEES AND OTHER COMMITTEES OF THE COUNCIL
Additional documents: Decision: Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee (COSC) re: Internal Audit – Review of Appraisals 2013/14
A copy of the COSC recommendation and the Cabinet Member for Business Services’ response is attached as Appendix 1 and 2 respectively. Minutes: Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee (COSC) re: Internal Audit – Review of Appraisals 2013/14
A copy of the COSC recommendation and the Cabinet Member for Business Services’ response is attached as Appendix 1 and 2 respectively. |
|
|
Year End Financial Budget Outturn 2013/14
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the 2013/14 net revenue budget underspend of £6.9m, as set out in Annex 1, paragraph 1 of the submitted report, be noted. 2. That the final 2013/14 revenue carry forward requests of £5.5m through transfer to the Budget Equalisation Reserve, as set out in Annex 1, paragraphs 2 and 36 of the submitted report, be approved. 3. That the residual revenue underspend of £1.4m be transferred to General Balances, as set out in Annex 1, paragraph 2 of the submitted report, be approved. 4. That the capital budget outturn of £224.1m be noted and the final capital carry forwards of £32.6m, as set out in Annex 1, paragraphs 79 to 82 of the submitted report, be approved. 5. That the reserves movements and year end general balances and reserves, as set out in Annex 1, Appendix, Table App5 of the submitted report, be noted. 6. That the revised revenue 2014/15 budget incorporating the 2013/14 transfers and carry forwards, as set out in Annex 2, paragraph 1 of the submitted report, be noted. 7. That the two 2014/15 revenue virements for SEN Reform Grant distribution and Children Service’s contact centre realignment, as set out in Annex 2, paragraph 2 and 4 be approved. 8. That the unpaid £3.3m Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) funds be held as a debtor on the Council’s Balance Sheet and that the Leader of the Council to write to the Department of Health strongly urging settlement of this debt. Reasons for Decisions To review and manage the budget outturn for the 2013/14 financial year in the context of a multi-year approach to financial management. To approve final carry forwards to enable on-going projects to continue.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Leader of the Council presented the revenue and capital budget outturn for 2013/14 financial year. He said that the County Council’s strategy was centred on working for the long term interests of Surrey residents and that his focus was to provide Surrey taxpayers with maximum Value for Money.
In referring to each of the recommendations in term, he highlighted the carry forward requests, many of which would enable projects, some of which were affected by the floods, to be completed.
He also amended a typo in recommendation (3) - from Annex 1, paragraph 56 to Annex 1, paragraph 2 and proposed adding an additional recommendation (8) which was:
‘That the unpaid £3.3m Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) funds be held as a debtor on the Council’s Balance Sheet and that the Leader of the Council to write to the Department of Health strongly urging settlement of this debt.’
He said that the annexes presented the final revenue and capital outturn for the 2013/14 financial year, which were based upon the final accounts at the end of March 2014. The carry forwards for revenue and capital were indicatively approved last month, but there were some minor changes between the indicative figures and actual. This report requested the minor changes and revenue reserve transfers.
He highlighted the outturn impacts upon the 2014 - 19 revenue and capital budget, and two revenue virement requests for allocating and distributing government grants and realigning the children’s service contact centre. He considered that the creation of a multi-agency safeguarding hub was an excellent example of partnership working and an important way forward.
He also confirmed that the County Council had achieved £62.3m efficiency savings in the financial year 2013/14 and that the capital budget would be re-profiled in July.
Finally, he referred to the transparency information in Annex 3 and confirmed that the 2013/14 Annual Report would be presented to the Audit and Governance Committee on 31 July 2014.
Other Cabinet Members were invited to highlight the key points and issues from their portfolios, as set out in the Annex to the report.
RESOLVED:
1. That the 2013/14 net revenue budget underspend of £6.9m, as set out in Annex 1, paragraph 1 of the submitted report, be noted. 2. That the final 2013/14 revenue carry forward requests of £5.5m through transfer to the Budget Equalisation Reserve, as set out in Annex 1, paragraphs 2 and 36 of the submitted report, be approved. 3. That the residual revenue underspend of £1.4m be transferred to General Balances, as set out in Annex 1, paragraph 2 of the submitted report, be approved. 4. That the capital budget outturn of £224.1m be noted and the final capital carry forwards of £32.6m, as set out in Annex 1, paragraphs 79 to 82 of the submitted report, be approved. 5. That the reserves movements and year end general balances and reserves, as set out in Annex 1, Appendix, Table App5 of the submitted report, be noted. 6. That the revised revenue 2014/15 budget ... view the full minutes text for item 99/14 |
|
|
Highways Asset Management Policy, Strategy and Prioritisation Policy and Criteria
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the Asset Management Policy be approved for publication.
2. That the Asset Management Strategy be approved for publication.
3. That the Prioritisation Policy and Criteria for the development of capital programmes for the five key Highway assets: Roads, Footways, Structures, Safety Barriers and Drainage be approved.
4. That any minor future amendments to the above be approved by the Strategic Director of Environment and Infrastructure in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding Recovery.
Reasons for Decisions:
All recommendations were informed through close working of officers with the Environment and Transport Select Committee. [The decisions on this item can be called in by the Environment and Transport Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding Recovery said that Surrey’s Transport Asset Management Plan (STAMP) was last published nearly 10 years ago. STAMP’s aim was to describe how the County Council would maintain all of Surreys Highways and Transport infrastructure, for Surrey’s residents.
New national guidance for developing Asset Management Plans for Highway Infrastructure was published in 2013. In line with this new guidance, the County Council produced Asset Management Policy and Strategy documents and revised the prioritisation criteria for the five key Highway Assets; Roads, Footways, Structures, Safety Barriers and Drainage.
The Cabinet Member referred to Project Horizon, the planned Highways programme, however, he stressed that the County Council would always undertake urgent repairs, such as those resulting from the winter flooding in Surrey. He stressed the importance of demonstrating that Surrey Highways was aligned with the Corporate policies of the Council.
He also highlighted the benefit of a single policy covering all highway assets to ensure consistency of approach and said that five key areas had been identified for the development of prioritised programmes:
· Highway Maintenance / Improvement Issues · Network Hierarchy · Risk · Value for Money · Network Management
Finally, he said that the Equality Impact Assessment detailed the impact of the proposals on residents and service users with protected characteristics.
The Leader of the Council confirmed that the Highways Asset Management Policy, Strategy and Prioritisation Policy and Criteria had been considered at the Environment and Transport Select Committee and that it had endorsed the recommendations.
RESOLVED:
1. That the Asset Management Policy be approved for publication.
2. That the Asset Management Strategy be approved for publication.
3. That the Prioritisation Policy and Criteria for the development of capital programmes for the five key Highway assets: Roads, Footways, Structures, Safety Barriers and Drainage be approved.
4. That any minor future amendments to the above be approved by the Strategic Director of Environment and Infrastructure in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Flooding Recovery.
Reasons for Decisions:
All recommendations were informed through close working of officers with the Environment and Transport Select Committee.
|
|
|
High Performance Leadership Development Programme
Additional documents: Decision: That contracts be awarded to the preferred bidders of WillisClare Ltd and Penna Plc as agreed on the basis, as set out in the Part 2 annexe.
Reasons for Decisions:
Leaders and managers are going through one of the most difficult phases ever to face the public sector. Surrey has to find £260m savings over the next three years and leaders and managers need to have the resilience to be able to lead and implement unprecedented transformation and still keep services performing well. The previous coaching programme has started to deliver real benefits for residents and the High Performance Development Programme is designed to take performance to another level.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Business Services set out the benefits of the High Performance Leadership Development Programme. She said that a coaching programme had taken place between 2009 and 2013. 1,545 people went through the programme and this was Phase 1 of the Leadership Development Pathway. Phase 2 - the new High Performance Development Programme (HPDP) had now been developed and after a successful pilot of the new HPDP, carried out between November 2013 and April 2014, a procurement exercise had now been completed to enable the Council to secure a supplier to deliver the full programme. (Financial information relating to the award of contracts was discussed in Part 2 of the agenda) The Cabinet Member referred to Annex A of the submitted report, which set out the Summary of Programme content. She confirmed that much of the programme would be delivered ‘in house’ by senior managers who had already completed the programme. Referring to Equality and Diversity, she confirmed the potentially positive impact on all employed staff through inclusion on this training and development programme. It was confirmed that the programme was compulsory for the Cabinet Team and would be available to all other Members on a voluntary basis. Other Members made the following points: · The importance of succession planning and ‘growing your own’ · That this programme would develop the skills to enable Members and staff to achieve their potential. RESOLVED:
That contracts be awarded to the preferred bidders of WillisClare Ltd and Penna Plc as agreed on the basis, as set out in the Part 2 annexe.
Reasons for Decisions:
Leaders and managers are going through one of the most difficult phases ever to face the public sector. Surrey has to find £260m savings over the next three years and leaders and managers need to have the resilience to be able to lead and implement unprecedented transformation and still keep services performing well. The previous coaching programme has started to deliver real benefits for residents and the High Performance Development Programme is designed to take performance to another level.
|
|
|
Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide
Additional documents: Decision: That the Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide, as amended, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
To support the adoption of a Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide,which creates a clear process and ensures that the Council maintains a fit for purpose set of guidance and rules to govern the award of grants.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Business Services said that the Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide set out how the Council governed allocation of funds by officers via grants. The new procedure formalised the approach to grant awards, reflecting best practice and Council priorities. She referred to the recommendations of the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee presented to Cabinet on 25 March 2014 and tabled an amendment to the Grant Process: 3.5.1 Briefing Document, proposing to add the following sentence to the end of that section:
‘Officers should ensure that any grants awarded are aligned with and support the Council’s Corporate Priorities.’
She said that this Guide would make it easier for organisations to understand the process and that the table set out in Section 2.2 (Grant or Tender Process) clearly set out how to decide the most appropriate way to fund the project / service.
Other Members welcomed the report and the Guide, and stressed the importance of the whole grant programme and the need to support the Council’s Corporate Priorities. The Cabinet Member for Community Services commented on the excellent Equalities Impact Assessment and said that it had already been considered at Communities Select Committee where Members had suggested that the Guide was circulated to Local Committees.
RESOLVED:
That the Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide, as amended, be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
To support the adoption of a Grant Criteria and Funding Opportunities Guide,which creates a clear process and ensures that the Council maintains a fit for purpose set of guidance and rules to govern the award of grants. |
|
|
Lime Tree Primary School, Redhill - new two form Primary School
Additional documents: Decision: That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the school as set out in agenda item 19 in Part 2, the business case for the provision of a new two form of entry primary school in Redhill be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Reigate and Banstead area.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning requested Cabinet’s approval for the business case for the provision of a brand new 2 form of entry primary school in Redhill to help meet the basic need requirements in the Reigate and Banstead area. She said that there had been an extensive search for a suitable site before the land in Battlebridge Lane had been identified as the most appropriate location. She also confirmed that planning permission had been granted for the 420 place primary school and nursery with 26 FTE places.
Finally, she said that Surrey County Council would build the school which would be an Academy, under the control of the Glyn Learning Foundation and that the financial information was set out, and would be considered, in Part 2 of the agenda.
Mr Essex, the local Member for Redhill East was invited to speak. He confirmed his support for the new school but asked for clarification on pupil numbers, stating that there were already bulge classes proposed for Year 1 and 2. The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning confirmed extensive expansion of school places in Reigate and Banstead and said that she would respond to his specific query outside the meeting.
RESOLVED:
That, subject to the agreement of the detailed financial information for the school as set out in agenda item 19 in Part 2, the business case for the provision of a new two form of entry primary school in Redhill be approved.
Reasons for Decisions
The proposal supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Reigate and Banstead area.
|
|
|
Purchase of 1 Aerial Ladder and 1 Turntable Ladder Vehicles
Additional documents: Decision: That contracts be awarded to the preferred supplier, as agreed, on the basis set out in the Part 2 annex to this agenda.
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process for the purchase of one Aerial Ladder Vehicle and one Turntable Ladder Vehicle, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Community Services introduced the report and said that a review of the Working at Height strategy for Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SF&RS) had identified that there was a need to replace the existing Aerial Ladder vehicles to ensure that Surrey’s fire-fighters have the best possible equipment for the benefit of Surrey residents. She also confirmed that there was no requirement for an Equality Impact Assessment to be undertaken in this instance, as set out in paragraph 27 and 28 of the submitted report. The Cabinet Member for Business Services referred to the procurement process undertaken for the award of two separate contracts for one Aerial Ladder Vehicle and one Turntable Ladder Vehicle, and in conjunction with the Part 2 report, said why the recommended contracts offered best value for money.
RESOLVED:
That contracts be awarded to the preferred supplier, as agreed, on the basis set out in the Part 2 annex to this agenda.
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process for the purchase of one Aerial Ladder Vehicle and one Turntable Ladder Vehicle, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
|
|
|
Establishment of a Property Company
Additional documents: Decision:
1. That the business case for the creation of a Property Company and associated subsidiary companies be approved, in order to take forward the agreed Investment Strategy. 2. That the governance arrangements for the Property Company, as set out in paragraphs 15 to 21 of the submitted report, including the Articles of Association of the Company be approved. 3. That the provision of initial equity finance, a working capital loan and a loan facility, as described in paragraphs 29 to 36 of the submitted report, be approved. Reasons for Decisions:
The Council’s Investment Strategy will support the council in achieving alternative sources of funding, thereby reducing reliance on government grants and council tax increases in the future. The creation of a property company is required to fully implement the recommendations of the agreed Investment Strategy and to achieve the target income included in the 2014-19 Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP).
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: The Investment Strategy agreed by Cabinet in July 2013 was developed in response to the requirement for the Council to maintain its financial resilience in the longer term. The Cabinet approved that the recommended governance arrangements were put in place, in order to consider individual investment opportunities and to provide advice to Cabinet on investment decisions.
Cabinet also approved that work commence on the preparation of a business case to establish a property investment company. This work was now completed, with the aid of specialist advisors, and the report set out the proposed company structure and associated governance arrangements.
The Cabinet Member for Business Services drew attention to the key points in the report, namely the table setting out the structure chart and also the section relating to Governance and Decision Making. She also confirmed that any decisions would still require Cabinet approval, and would be subject to scrutiny. Also, the Investment Advisory Board would be responsible for strategically managing the overall portfolio. Finally, she referred to the Financial and Value for Money Implications together with the S151 officer’s commentary and also confirmed that the Property Company’s Business Plan would be considered in part 2 of the agenda.
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the creation of a Property Company and associated subsidiary companies be approved, in order to take forward the agreed Investment Strategy. 2. That the governance arrangements for the Property Company, as set out in paragraphs 15 to 21 of the submitted report, including the Articles of Association of the Company be approved. 3. That the provision of initial equity finance, a working capital loan and a loan facility, as described in paragraphs 29 to 36 of the submitted report, be approved. Reasons for Decisions:
The Council’s Investment Strategy will support the council in achieving alternative sources of funding, thereby reducing reliance on government grants and council tax increases in the future. The creation of a property company is required to fully implement the recommendations of the agreed Investment Strategy and to achieve the target income included in the 2014-19 Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP).
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: This item was deferred to the next Cabinet meeting on 24 June 2014.
|
|
|
LEADER / DEPUTY LEADER / CABINET MEMBER DECISIONS TAKEN SINCE THE LAST CABINET MEETING
Additional documents: Decision: That the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members under delegated authority. Minutes: To note the delegated decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting of the Cabinet.
RESOLVED:
That the decisions taken by Cabinet Members since the last meeting as set out in Annex 1 of the submitted report, be noted.
Reasons for Decisions:
To inform the Cabinet of decisions taken by Cabinet Members under delegated authority. |
|
|
Woking Magistrates' Court Conversion to Coroner's Court
Additional documents: Decision: 1. That the additional capital investment, required to provide fit and proper accommodation for the Coronial Service, as set out in the part 2 annex, be approved.
2. That the award of the contract and commencement of construction works for the fit out of Woking Magistrates’ Court, subject to the appropriate procurement procedures, be approved.
3. That a letter be written to the Southern Regional Coroners’ Managers’ Group, in time for their meeting with the Ministry of Justice in October 2014, with a business case to recoup some of the costs.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposed refurbishment of Woking Magistrates Court (WMC) will enable Surrey County Council (SCC) and HM Coroner for Surrey to fulfil the statutory responsibilities arising from the implementation of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Having a dedicated Coroner Court Complex, provides a professional and reassuring environment to bereaved families, and results in a more efficient and effective Coronial Service, as all the staff will be co-located and work will not be required to be undertaken off site.
The additional investment is required because an opportunity to create a second Jury Court, which could generate an income, has been identified. In addition, the original estimates did not include the full requirement for extensive audio/visual equipment within the courts, or include the costs associated with the necessity to have both SCC and Surrey Police networks within the building.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Communities Select Committee]
Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Community Services requested approval for additional capital investment to provide fit and proper accommodation for the Coronial Service by converting and refurbishing Woking Magistrates’ Court, purchased by the County Council in December 2013. She said that the increased costs were not known at the time of approving the Medium Term Financial Plan and therefore it was not included in the capital budget. The additional investment would enable the Coronial Service to carry out the statutory responsibilities arising from the implementation of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
She stressed the importance of making the Coroner’s Court fully accessible for people with disabilities and Cabinet considered whether an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) was required for this decision. Advice received stated that there was no legal requirement to carry out an EIA, and whilst it was recommended if there were any adverse effects, it would not be necessary to carry one out in every case. As no adverse effects have been identified and access to the Coroner’s Service would be improved for staff and bereaved families, Cabinet was satisfied that any conversion of the building would meet the current guidelines for accessibility.
Finally, an additional recommendation (3) relating to making a case to the Southern Regional Coroners’ Managers’ Group to recoup some of the costs was proposed and agreed.
RESOLVED:
1. That the additional capital investment, required to provide fit and proper accommodation for the Coronial Service, as set out in the part 2 annex, be approved.
2. That the award of the contract and commencement of construction works for the fit out of Woking Magistrates’ Court, subject to the appropriate procurement procedures, be approved.
3. That a letter be written to the Southern Regional Coroners’ Managers’ Group, in time for their meeting with the Ministry of Justice in October 2014, with a business case to recoup some of the costs.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposed refurbishment of Woking Magistrates Court (WMC) will enable Surrey County Council (SCC) and HM Coroner for Surrey to fulfil the statutory responsibilities arising from the implementation of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Having a dedicated Coroner Court Complex, provides a professional and reassuring environment to bereaved families, and results in a more efficient and effective Coronial Service, as all the staff will be co-located and work will not be required to be undertaken off site.
The additional investment is required because an opportunity to create a second Jury Court, which could generate an income, has been identified. In addition, the original estimates did not include the full requirement for extensive audio/visual equipment within the courts, or include the costs associated with the necessity to have both SCC and Surrey Police networks within the building.
|
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Additional documents: Minutes: RESOLVED that under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
PART TWO – IN PRIVATE
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS OF BUSINESS WERE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE BY THE CABINET. SET OUT BELOW IS A PUBLIC SUMMARY OF THE DECISIONS TAKEN.
|
|
|
Surrey Fire & Rescue: Renew Contract Arrangements for Specialist Rescue and Contingency Crewing
Minutes: This item was deferred to the next Cabinet meeting on 24 June 2014. |
|
|
Establishment of a Property Company
Minutes: This was the Part 2 Annex relating to item 12. |
|
|
Lime Tree Primary School, Redhill - new 2 form Primary School
Decision: 1. That the business case for the project to build a new two form of entry primary school, to be called Lime Tree Primary, at a total estimated cost as set out in the submitted report, be approved..
2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Strategic Director for Business Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning and the Leader of the Council be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Redhill area.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Children and Education Select Committee] Minutes: The Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning introduced the report and said that it provided the financial details for the report, already considered in Part 1 of the agenda. She said that the site was particularly challenging in terms of access, ground levels and drainage which accounted for the variation from the average price for building a school.
RESOLVED:
1. That the business case for the project to build a new two form of entry primary school, to be called Lime Tree Primary, at a total estimated cost as set out in the submitted report, be approved..
2. That the arrangements by which a variation of up to 10% of the total value may be agreed by the Strategic Director for Business Services in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning and the Leader of the Council be approved.
Reasons for Decisions:
The proposal delivers and supports the Authority’s statutory obligation to provide sufficient school places to meet the needs of the population in the Redhill area. |
|
|
Surrey Fire and Rescue Service: Aerial Ladder and Turntable Ladder Vehicles
Decision: That a fixed price contract be awarded to North Fire for Lot 1: purchase of one Aerial Ladder vehicle at a value, as set out in the submitted report, and also to North Fire for Lot 2: purchase of one Turntable Ladder vehicle at a value, as set out in the submitted report, to commence on 1 July 2014.
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide the very best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. North Fire is a premier fire fighting vehicle and equipment supplier to Fire and Rescue Services throughout the UK and Ireland and was formed eight years ago. It is based in Holmfirth, West Yorkshire.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Communities Select Committee] Minutes: RESOLVED:
That a fixed price contract be awarded to North Fire for Lot 1: purchase of one Aerial Ladder vehicle at a value, as set out in the submitted report, and also to North Fire for Lot 2: purchase of one Turntable Ladder vehicle at a value, as set out in the submitted report, to commence on 1 July 2014.
Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide the very best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process. North Fire is a premier fire fighting vehicle and equipment supplier to Fire and Rescue Services throughout the UK and Ireland and was formed eight years ago. It is based in Holmfirth, West Yorkshire. |
|
|
High Performance Leadership Development Programme
Decision: 1. That the award of a contract be awarded to WillisClare Ltd and Penna Plc, at a value, as set out in the submitted report, for the provision of the HPDP to commence on 11 June 2014. 2. Based on the anticipated delegate attendance, the spend within each individual contracts to be awarded as set out in the submitted report. Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee]
Minutes: RESOLVED:
1. That the award of a contract be awarded to WillisClare Ltd and Penna Plc, at a value, as set out in the submitted report, for the provision of the HPDP to commence on 11 June 2014. 2. Based on the anticipated delegate attendance, the spend within each individual contracts to be awarded, as set out in the submitted report. Reasons for Decisions:
A full tender process, in compliance with the requirement of EU Procurement Legislation and Procurement Standing Orders has been completed, and the recommendations provide best value for money for the Council following a thorough evaluation process.
|
|
|
Woking Magistrates Court Conversion to Coroner's Court
Decision: 1. That the additional capital investment, as detailed in the part 2 report, to provide fit and proper accommodation for the Coronial Service, be approved.
2. The award of the contract and commencement of construction works for the fit out of Woking Magistrates’ Court, subject to the appropriate procurement procedures, be approved.
Reason for Decisions:
The additional investment is required because an opportunity to create a second Jury Court, which could generate an income, has been identified. In addition, the original estimates did not include the full requirement for extensive audio/visual equipment within the courts, or include the costs associated with the necessity to have both SCC and Surrey Police networks within the building.
[The decisions on this item can be called in by either the Council Overview and Scrutiny Committee or the Communities Select Committee]
Minutes: RESOLVED:
1. That the additional capital investment, as detailed in the part 2 report, to provide fit and proper accommodation for the Coronial Service, be approved.
2. The award of the contract and commencement of construction works for the fit out of Woking Magistrates’ Court, subject to the appropriate procurement procedures, be approved.
Reason for Decisions:
The additional investment is required because an opportunity to create a second Jury Court, which could generate an income, has been identified. In addition, the original estimates did not include the full requirement for extensive audio/visual equipment within the courts, or include the costs associated with the necessity to have both SCC and Surrey Police networks within the building.
|
|
|
PUBLICITY FOR PART 2 ITEMS
Additional documents: Minutes: That non-exempt information relating to items considered in Part 2 of the meeting may be made available to the press and public, as appropriate. |